In lawsuit, Chinese writers allege Cisco aids government

Three
Chinese writers who have spent time in prison for articles published online are
suing California-based Cisco Systems Inc., according to international news
reports. The suit accuses the company of providing information and technology
to Chinese authorities that facilitated the writers' detentions--allegations that
Cisco flatly denies. Chinese security officials have already interrogated one
of the plaintiffs, according to his lawyer. Will the case against Cisco protect
him and others in China from further repercussions?

The
writers, Du Daobin, Liu Xianbin, and Zhou Yuanzhi, are represented by the Washington-based
law firm Ward & Ward. The
case was filed in June in U.S. District Court in Maryland against Cisco and a
number of its executives, lawyer
Dan Ward wrote on the firm's website. Financial support is being provided by
the Laogai
Research Foundation,
a D.C.-based advocacy group focusing on forced labor and broader human rights
issues in China.

All
three writers have endured persecution for expressing their views online, and
CPJ has reported on their cases over the years:

Du
Daobin was arrested in 2003
and given a suspended prison sentence for inciting subversion of state power
through his writings the following year. Authorities re-arrested him in 2008,
just days before that term was due to expire, apparently as part of the crackdown that preceded the Beijing Olympics. He was released
on December 8, 2010, according to the Hong Kong-based group Chinese Human Rights Defenders.

Liu
Xianbin was detained in June 2010 and sentenced in March to 10 years on charges of inciting subversion,
again for online articles.

The
Independent Chinese PEN Center said Zhou Yuanzhi was also detained for inciting
subversion in 2008.
CPJ could not independently confirm that at the time, and Zhou was subsequently
released without charge, according to PEN. He is currently under home
surveillance, according to The Sydney Morning Herald.

Their
lawyers will try to prove that Cisco is implicated in this persecution. Ward wrote that internal documents detail the company's development
and implementation of the Golden Shield censorship system for the
Chinese Communist Party. Besides blocking content, the system provides "the
means to identify and locate Internet users instantaneously," Ward alleges. He
continues:

There is evidence that
Cisco created an "Advanced Service Team" that was dedicated to training
officials of the Chinese Communist Party to use Cisco products to these ends.

Further documents,
according to Ward, show that "Cisco specifically marketed their products with
the intent and knowledge they would be used to persecute free-thinkers,
political activists, and other targets of oppression across China."

In response to a
request for comment on the case, John Earnhardt, Cisco's public relations and
social media director, referred CPJ to a June blog
entry by Mark Chandler, Cisco's senior vice president,
general counsel and secretary, that also alludes to another recent lawsuit. (Three
members of the religious organization Falun Gong, which is banned in China, filed
suit against Cisco in U.S. District Court in San Jose, Calif., in May, alleging
the company's technology was used to track group members, according to The New York Times.) "The lawsuits are inaccurate and entirely without
foundation," Chandler wrote. He continued:

We
have never customized our equipment to help the Chinese government--or any
government--censor content, track Internet use by individuals or intercept
Internet communications.

Chandler
also writes that "we
fundamentally believe in and adhere to global standards" and that "our sales
activities are in strict compliance with U.S. export rules and regulations,
which are informed and guided by human rights principles."

The litigation could have implications for other companies
operating in China, according to Cindy Cohn, legal director at the Electronic
Frontier Foundation, a digital advocacy rights group based in San Francisco. "There's an opportunity for
these cases to set legal precedent around a company's responsibilities when
selling surveillance technology, but just as importantly these cases could
inspire changes in law, practice, and policy that will affect American export
practices," she told CPJ by email.

U.S.-based corporations have faced criticism for cooperating
with the Chinese government in the past:

Yahoo's Hong Kong subsidiary provided Chinese authorities with
the personal email account of freelance journalist Shi Tao, leading to his arrest
and 10-year imprisonment in 2005 for
emailing purportedly classified information overseas. The U.S. House Committee on Foreign
Affairs later rebuked Yahoo executives for wrongly testifying that the company
did not know the Chinese government's reason in seeking the information. Yahoo later settled a lawsuit filed
in the United States by the family of Shi Tao.

Press freedom
advocates criticized Microsoft in 2006 for
obeying the Chinese information authorities' command to remove a blog on its
hosting platform MSN Spaces, which had published censored information.

Google's China-based
search engine complied with local censorship laws from 2006 until 2010,
when it re-routed users within China to its unrestricted Hong Kong site.

That criticism
has led to some positive results. In 2008, Yahoo, Google, and Microsoft joined
with human rights organizations including CPJ, academics, and investors to form
the Global Network Initiative, adopting principles to protect online privacy and free
expression. So far, however, other companies have not followed their example.
Yet in China, information authorities increasingly put pressure on software
and network providers
to censor and monitor their customers as a condition of operation. The threat
of legal action may encourage other businesses to examine any potential
negative impact of their activities in China.

"It's
no longer acceptable for companies to plead ignorance about how technology they
sell is used," said Cohn of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "It's incumbent upon experts in the field to create standards
to guide companies in making ethical business practices, so that companies like
Cisco can't delude themselves or their investors about the blood-stained
profits they derived from their business deals with China or other
authoritarian governments."

Dan Ward reported
that security officials interrogated Du Daobin over his role in bringing the
lawsuit earlier this month. The
news is a reminder that while international companies grapple with the rights
and wrongs of operating in China, the end users remain dangerously vulnerable.
CPJ documented at least 34 journalists in Chinese prisons when it conducted its
annual census in 2010,
with over half writing online. Detentions continued during a harsh crackdown
this year. If corporations are to avoid complicity in these repressive
measures, their re-examination of
best practices cannot happen soon enough.

Madeline Earp is senior researcher for CPJ’s Asia Program. She has studied Mandarin in China and Taiwan, and graduated with a master’s in East Asian studies from Harvard. Follow her on Twitter @cpjasia and Facebook @ CPJ Asia Desk.

Share

Deciding who decides which news is fake

March 14, 2017 6:09 PM ET

Authorities decry the proliferation of misinformation and propaganda on the internet, and technology companies are wrestling with various measures to combat fake news. But addressing the problem without infringing on the right to free expression and the free flow of information is extremely thorny....

Snowden travels trace a path of government hypocrisy

June 24, 2013 9:03 AM ET

Edward Snowden's global travels have highlighted the chasm between the political posturing and actual practices of governments when it comes to free expression. As is well known now, the former government contractor's leaks exposed the widespread phone and digital surveillance being conducted by the U.S. National Security Agency, practices...

Kerry should press Beijing on press freedom

April 12, 2013 3:30 PM ET

As John Kerry visits China this weekend in his first trip there as U.S. secretary of state, he should take the opportunity to engage Chinese leaders on their problematic record regarding press freedom. ...

Drawing lessons from Chinese attacks on US media

February 7, 2013 12:38 PM ET

Not every media company is as tempting a target for hackers as The New York Times, The Washington Post, or The Wall Street Journal. Not every company can afford high-priced computer security consultants, either. Is there anything that everyday reporters and their editors can learn about protecting themselves, based...